Academic fraud in marine biology

[Quartz]

A major controversy in marine biology took a new twist last week when the University of Delaware (UD) found one of its star scientists guilty of research misconduct. The university has confirmed to Science that it has accepted an investigative panel’s conclusion that marine ecologist Danielle Dixson committed fabrication and falsification in work on fish behavior and coral reefs. The university is seeking the retraction of three of Dixson’s papers and “has notified the appropriate federal agencies,” a spokesperson says.

Star marine ecologist committed misconduct, university says

Finding against Danielle Dixson vindicates whistleblowers who questioned high-profile work on ocean acidification

www.science.org

That the fraud occurred is of course bad but that it was caught shows the rigour of the scientific system. My concern is that climate change deniers will jump on this.

 

[bloodiedathame]

Oh my Cod!

 

[touch]

I always knew there was something fishy with that paper!

 

[Efour]

Very fishy business. No pedophilia either.

god sake beaten by seconds

 

[Ayahuasca]

 

[Scougar]

University of Delaware huh? Pass there frequently on my way to my daughters acting lessons, so this fish is definitely swimming close to home.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Oh carp.

 

[Quartz]

I see I have cast my net in good waters.

 

[Whitewater]

So can I drive my car like a hooligan again?

Edit: insert crabby fish pun.

 

[G-MAN2004]

He should lose his plaice at the uni.

 

[Malevolence]

found one of its star scientists guilty of research misconduct.

 

[Hades]

Hopefully he will have to pay a big fin.

 

[OldKitMan]

Sounds like he's skating on thin ice. That's what you get for trying to be efishent.

 

[new boy]

What fraud took plaice in pacific?

 

[Lopéz]

Good greef, I don't believe this atoll.

 

[Lysander]

A lot of data doesn't get checked or even verified at peer review level. That said, I'm really pleased people from Nature were able to check this out. More than anything it shows the holes in the review process. So much stuff gets waved through. I'm guilty of it myself.

Yes, that's the point of peer review, but academia is an incestuous wasteground of self-validation and back-rubbing. It's an absolute scam in many ways.

 

[Quartz]

A lot of data doesn't get checked or even verified at peer review level.

As I understand it, peer review simply means that the paper looks to be of interest and is not obviously wrong. As you say, peer review does not mean verification.

 

[LOAM]

I don't think they should mackerel a big eel out of this, it's tempting to want severe punishment halibut that would be shellfish.

 

[CapitalOne]

@Quartz

I’d think it fair with your title to quote more than a single example, otherwise please consider renaming to “An example of…..” to be less disingenous.

Annoyed

Tunbridge Wells

 

[Quartz]

I’d think it fair with your title to quote more than a single example

The article to which I linked gives more.